From Tom Batiuk’s Blog
Cidu Bill on Dec 19th 2009
“And happy… no…. merry Christmas.”
Is there a more obnoxious manner in which he could have made his point that only one holiday this month deserves his respect? This is Johnny Hart-worthy.
Filed in Bill Bickel, Christmas, Johnny Hart, Tom Batiuk | 81 responses so far
Sili Dec 19th 2009 at 02:56 pm 1
It must be strange to be submerged in that culture.
I had to think about what the problem was, since “Happy Christmas” sounds pretty normal to me. I needed the extra minute to realise you meant “Holidays”.
yellojkt Dec 19th 2009 at 03:11 pm 2
He just can’t bear to think anybody is happy. Hence all the tragedy is his strips.
Kaitlyn Dec 19th 2009 at 03:14 pm 3
A commercial for Pier 1 ends with “Happy Christmas” It does sound odd.
He could have said “Merry Christmas” no one would care. But by making it part of “the war on Christmas” now both sides will be agitated. (”What comics are good Christmas comics?” and “Way to be a jerk, Batiuk. Because you got everyone agitated.”)
Cidu Bill Dec 19th 2009 at 03:20 pm 4
I believe “Happy Christmas” is more common in England. Which is irrelevant to the matter at hand, but since when do we care about that here?
Frosted Donut Dec 19th 2009 at 03:43 pm 5
These days, it’s mostly “Merry Christmas”, but once upon a time…
He sprang to his sleigh, to his team gave a whistle,
And away they all flew like the down of a thistle,
But I heard him exclaim, ere he drove out of sight,
“Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good-night.”
–A Visit from St. Nicholas by Clement Clarke Moore
Rebecca Dec 19th 2009 at 04:20 pm 6
Wasn’t there a John Lennon song that had him whispering “Happy Christmas” while Yoko said “Merry Christmas”? I remember the weirdest things …
I don’t think it’s offensive for someone who only celebrates Christmas to wish others “Merry Christmas,” but the whole “war on Christmas” thing is just beyond me. Guess what: you cannot tell whether someone is a Christian or not by looking at them. That is why strangers wish you Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas.
CIDU Bill Dec 19th 2009 at 04:36 pm 7
Rebecca, it’s not a matter of Butiuk wishing people a Merry Christmas as much as the way he makes a point of starting to write “Happy Holidays” and then changing it to something “more appropriate.”
Why should anybody object to one Christian wishing another Christian a Merry Christmas? In fact I don’t believe anybody ever has — that’s just a myth the “war on Christmas” people came up with. Personally, I don’t mind people wishing me a Merry Christmas, as long as they’re okay with the fact that I celebrate it by eating Chinese food and going to the movies.
I think it was last year that I theorized that you’re more likely to see a Jew in a Chinese restaurant on Christmas than in a synogogue on Yom Kippur.
Lots of Indian-Americans in my neck of the woods as well. Last Christmas, every theatre that was showing Slumdog Millionaire sold out every show.
But I digress.
Pete Dec 19th 2009 at 06:47 pm 8
<>
I don’t see that at all. It looks to me like he started to say “Happy Christmas” then changed it to “Merry Christmas.” Merriment being more intense than happiness.
I don’t see how failure to mention other holidays is an insult.
I’m unfamiliar with this comic, except for what I see on this site. Does the writer have any history of bigotry and obnoxiousness?
And didn’t you promise to stop reading the comic anyway?
Winter Wallaby Dec 19th 2009 at 07:18 pm 9
Well, sure. For example, I have a Jewish friend who was told by a co-worker, “Have a Merry Christmas, and I mean Merry Christmas, and not some other holiday.” For other, more obnoxious examples, see Fox News, 2004-2009.
Of course, you’re probably pointing out that Batiuk is being obnoxious, rather than truly speculating on whether he could be even more obnoxious.
furrykef Dec 19th 2009 at 09:58 pm 10
I’m as annoyed as anybody with this nonexistent “War on Christmas”, but I won’t delve into the topic because, well, what can be said about it that hasn’t been said a thousand times?
turquoise cow Dec 20th 2009 at 12:39 am 11
i don’t see why people get annoyed by the saying “happy holidays.” If you know someone celebrates Christmas (and, no, you don’t HAVE to be Christian to do so, as I know many people who aren’t and do, but that’s another debate altogether now) then say “Happy/Merry Christmas.” If you know someone Jewish, you say “Happy Hanukkah.” If you don’t know what the person celebrates, then why risk offending them by assuming that they subscribe to your religion? I bet the people who get annoyed when store employees say “Happy Holidays” would get very upset if someone said “Happy (Insert Wrong Holiday Here).”
The one thing you CAN assume, being in the US, is that the person is going to be celebrating some holiday in the coming days/weeks, whether it’s Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanza, Winter Solstice, some combination of the above, or something else entirely. So “Happy Holidays” covers all cultures, all religions, and all bases. What’s wrong with that??
Longest August Dec 20th 2009 at 01:23 am 12
I’ve never really understood the problem with saying “Merry Christmas” to people who don’t celebrate Christmas. I’m wishing you well based on something that’s important to me, and you can take it or leave it. I wouldn’t be offended in the slightest if someone wished me a Happy Hanukkah or a Joyful Winter Solstice–just because I don’t share their views/beliefs/holidays doesn’t mean I won’t accept their greeting.
I’m also getting tired of the idea that only Christians can celebrate Christmas and that anyone who says “merry Christmas” instead of “Happy Holidays” is a Christian. But that’s another topic.
Lihtox Dec 20th 2009 at 02:25 am 13
@Longest: there’s a difference between being part of a majority and being part of a minority, so you can’t really generalize your experience to theirs. (For one thing, you are wished a Happy Hanukkah far less than a typical Jewish American is wished Merry Christmas; these things can add up. Perhaps if everyone started wishing you a Happy Hanukkah, because they assumed you were Jewish for some reason, it would start to bug you too.
Or maybe not; people are sensitive about different things. I’d guess many if not most non-Christian Americans agree with you, and see the warm wishes behind “Merry Christmas”. But some are sensitive to it, and while it may be irrational, it is kind to be sensitive to other people’s sensitivities (and also prudent, if one is a businessperson trying to attract said people to their store).
chuckers Dec 20th 2009 at 04:06 am 14
I realise the line was taken out of context (I don’t read his blog) but just based on that line, it looks like he might have been going to write Happy Christmas and then realised “Merry” was more traditional.
Or should I go read the blog and find out he was in the midst of a “War on Christmas” diatribe?
Know what, nevermind. I can’t really be bothered.
Singapore Bill Dec 20th 2009 at 06:23 am 15
“Diversity” is just another word for “TERRORISM”!!!!!!!!1!!!111!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!
Keera Dec 20th 2009 at 06:58 am 16
What Chuckers said. On the official Funky Winkerbean site, the current comic reads, “Happy Holidays! And Merry Christmas, too”! I have no problem with that.
bAT L. Dec 20th 2009 at 09:07 am 17
I’m of the school of thought that one can wish a happy or merry X on anyone, regardless of what faith they are. What I mean by this is that we should be able to say Merry Christmas or Happy Kwanzaa if that’s what we celebrate and the addressee can either return it or just ignore it. That way people can express that they celebrate certain holidays, but it doesn’t have to be a big issue.
Maybe to demonstrate the example we can get some Flying Spaghetti Monster holidays to force upon people.
Longest August Dec 20th 2009 at 09:33 am 18
“Perhaps if everyone started wishing you a Happy Hanukkah, because they assumed you were Jewish for some reason, it would start to bug you too.”
See, the problem is the assumption that anyone who wishes someone a Merry Christmas assumes that person (a) is Christian and/or (b) celebrates Christmas. That may be true of some people, but I know that I greet people based on what I celebrate, because that’s what means something to me. Majority vs. minority doesn’t really enter into it. (And, FWIW, I’m not Christian, but I celebrate the Christmas holiday with my family.)
(Basically, I’m with bAT L.)
Lihtox Dec 20th 2009 at 09:55 am 19
@Longest: That’s a reasonable interpretation, and I wish everyone would interpret “Merry Christmas” that way too. But not everyone does, and for that matter not everyone means it that way: some of those people who get upset by “Happy Holidays” probably say “Merry Christmas” to mean “You better not forget Jesus!”– it’s become a militant cry for some.
Daniel J. Drazen Dec 20th 2009 at 10:00 am 20
Is “merry” even used at any other time of the year? I usually tell people “Have a good holiday” myself.
Eric L Dec 20th 2009 at 10:02 am 21
Merry Christmas = Have a good December 25th
Happy Holidays = Have a good month or so stretching from Thanksgiving until New Years.
There’s nothing political or religious about it. You’re simply wishing people well for the entire season as opposed to just one day which they may not even celebrate.
S.P. Charles Dec 20th 2009 at 01:51 pm 22
Longest August, why would a non-Christian possibly want to celebrate Christmas? And why would a Christian possibly want him to?
The Bad Seed Dec 20th 2009 at 01:54 pm 23
My dear departed father took “Freedom of Speech” to mean that he had every right to say absolutely everything that popped into his head, which I think we’d all pretty much agree with. BUT he also believed that nobody else was allowed to say anything that HE disagreed with, because somehow that was taking away HIS right to free speech.
The “War Against Christmas” people are similar, in that they seem to believe that everyone has equal freedoms only if they agree with them. Acknowledging that someone else has different beliefs - of whatever sort - does NOT diminish your own beliefs. It’s a shame that certain people don’t believe that people will listen to and respect them solely on their own merits, but that they believe they have to make themselves look like victims and try to make other people look bad. If you think you’re right and you’re happy, isn’t that enough? Set a great example and people will follow.
The Bad Seed Dec 20th 2009 at 01:59 pm 24
p.s. The above post is predicated on my belief that he was originally going to wish people “Happy Holidays” in order to placate the nasty, bullying, heathen non-Christians, but instead decided to be all militant and daring and wish people a “Merry Christmas”.
Personally, I’m not insulted if someone wishes me a Happy Hannukah or Merry Ramadan (or whatever), but I don’t see the point in wishing me a happy something-I-don’t-personally-celebrate. I’m mildly puzzled when people wish me a “Happy Mother’s Day” since I don’t have kids, but - once again - I’m not offended. Oddly enough, I have REAL things to worry about in my life.
Cidu Bill Dec 20th 2009 at 02:06 pm 25
I heard yesterday that some retail store mention Eid in its December ads, and they got complaints that this was disrespectful of Christmas.
The Bad Seed Dec 20th 2009 at 02:08 pm 26
p.p.s. As for non-Christians celebrating Christian holidays: My best friend in elementary school was Jewish, but her mother was born and raised Catholic (she converted when she married). They all identified as Jewish, attended synogogue, celebrated all the Jewish holidays, and all had Bar/Bat Mitzvah’s and Jewish confirmations and weddings, but they also had a Christmas tree and celebrated Christmas. It was part of her mother’s upbringing and her mother’s family all still celebrated it, of course, so it never seemed odd to them.
I can see why other non-Christians would want to celebrate Christmas, too, because it’s a fun holiday with gifts, and our culture has plenty of non-Jesus Christmas-y things fill the season with. If people want to decorate, give gifts, and celebrate peace, family, and love, who would complain?
S.P. Charles Dec 20th 2009 at 02:17 pm 27
Bad Seed, I assume you’re aware that people can celebrate a fun holiday in late December with gifts, family, peace, love, etc without it being Christmas.
Keera Dec 20th 2009 at 02:22 pm 28
S.P. Charles, I celebrate Christmas without being a Christian. It’s what people do in Norway. And honestly, it’s what I did in the US, too, because for those of us of European heritage tend to have Christian traditions. You know, putting up a tree and opening presents on December 25 (or 24, here in Norway).
Bill, your comment about protests against Eid reminds me of one of my annoyances: People who try to ignore that December 25th is Christmas Day. Sometimes the “political correctness” goes overboard in the other direction, too.
Paul Dec 20th 2009 at 02:45 pm 29
“Longest August, why would a non-Christian possibly want to celebrate Christmas? And why would a Christian possibly want him to?”
I’m not a Christian and I celebrate Christmas. It’s mostly a secular holiday these days.
Wishing someone who doesn’t celebrate a “Merry Christmas” isn’t necessarily offensive to most non-celebrants, but I’d imagine it’s annoying. And using “Happy Holidays” tend to be more inclusive (which retailers generally like to be.
For those of you wishing people “Merry Christmas” because you celebrate it, would you go around wishing everyone a “Happy 4th of July” if you were in England on Independence Day?
Cidu Bill Dec 20th 2009 at 02:52 pm 30
Keera, how is acknowledging that Muslims have an important holiday as well going overboard on political correctness? This doesn’t take anything away from Christmas.
People have actually complained about the post office selling Chanukah, Eid and Kwanzaa stamps. I mean come on, you don’t have to buy them.
Keera Dec 20th 2009 at 03:22 pm 31
Bill, my PC comment was about “forgetting” Dec. 25 is Christmas in order not to offend non-Christians. Yes, I’ve encountered those. Me, I don’t care one way or the other since I’m not invested in any particular belief system (a privilege we of Christian “descent” have and should appreciate more). I do love the opportunity to hang up lots of extra lights because when the night grows to 18 hours long, seeing warm glows from windows is very cheering.
Paul, I want to butt in.
I’m an American who lives in a country that does not have Thanksgiving, and do not see the point in being wished a Happy Thanksgiving just because I’m an American. I don’t celebrate the holiday since it’s just a regular Thursday for me and I’m usually at work. If I lived in the US, I’d have the day off and be eating turkey and pumpkin pie.
CIDU Bill Dec 20th 2009 at 03:38 pm 32
Set your mind at ease, Keera, nobody’s going to forget that December 25 is Christmas. And that’s nobody’s desire, either.
jayjaybear Dec 20th 2009 at 03:54 pm 33
Speaking as an atheist, I don’t mind being told Merry Christmas. I don’t really think anyone does, beyond possibly a mild annoyance at the assumption that the person you’re talking to celebrates that holiday.
The “War on Christmas” is entirely a right-wing Christian fabrication. They’re the ones going to stores and listening for the “right” Christmas music, or the “right” Christmas wrapping paper, or the “right” greeting from the clerks. Nobody is trying to marginalize Christmas, so the rw Christians have to make up “attacks” on the baby Jesus.
Kate C Dec 20th 2009 at 05:17 pm 34
SP Charles–My family is not Christian (despite my extremely WASP-y name), but we celebrate Christmas because we live in the US, and Christmas is the big holiday here. When my siblings and I were kids, we got the days surrounding Christmas off my school, and now as adults have travel/work flexibility around Christmas (because that’s what the majority of the office celebrates). It’s easy to get time off to spend with family, and since we’re together, we cook a nice meal and exchange gifts.
Cornbread Dec 20th 2009 at 06:10 pm 35
Just to weigh in, as a young adult from a rather liberal non-Christian family, I grew up hearing and reading the phrases Happy Holidays and Season’s Greetings alongside Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. They’re part of the way I’ve experienced Christmas my whole life. Try as I might, I can’t intellectualize it to the point where I can decide whether it’s necessary, offensive, anti-traditional, or in any way objectionable to use the words or not. When I see the phrase “Happy Holidays,” I don’t think “Oh, that’s so unnecessarily PC,” nor do I think “Oh, it’s a good thing they’re including all the holidays in that so as not to offend anyone.” I just think, “Oh, it’s that time of year again. Time to celebrate.”
When people get uppity about it, either for or against, I can only conclude that they either grew up before it became popular or were raised in a much more exclusively Christian household. So I can’t really relate at all.
Cidu Bill Dec 20th 2009 at 07:03 pm 36
Kate C, this isn’t about who does and doesn’t celebrate Christmas, but rather about showing respect for people who celebrate other holidays — and of course the nutjobs who believe, or claim to believe, that showing respect for other people’s holidays demeans, weakens, or even ruins Christmas.
Howabominable (aka Lindsey ^_^) Dec 20th 2009 at 07:56 pm 37
I’m a Christian and I have no problem with non-Christians celebrating Christmas. The holiday means different things to different people. For Christians, it celebrates the birth of Jesus. For others it may mean a time to gather with their family and exchange gifts and show each other that they love each other. It may be a time to spread goodwill and help others. That’s great, and I am 100% supportive of people who want to do that. I don’t understand the “War on Christmas.” Whatever Christmas means to other people, that doesn’t change what it means to me and my family and how we celebrate.
I always use “Happy Holidays” unless I know that the person I’m talking to celebrates Christmas. It’s not that I’m against Christmas, it’s just about being respectful towards others.
Nicole Dec 20th 2009 at 10:44 pm 38
Please forgive me if this ahs already been said as I have not read all the previous comments. From
Tom Batiuk is an asshat
As is anyone who truly believes that there is a ‘war on Christmas’. Is there any other religious holiday that is celebrated by the entire country? Is there any other religious holiday that the entire country shuts down for ? For those who DO believe there is a war on Christmas — grow up!
Surprisingly enough … not everyone on the planet shares your belief system and the end of the year happens to be important to many cultures because of the solstice. So the generic “Season’s Greetings” or “Happy Holidays” is a way of respecting all those traditions. Or is the only tradition we are supposed to respect is yours ?
And while we are on the subject … have you looked at the Christmas ornaments they are selling ??? Star Wars… Spiderman … Barbie …. Indiana Jones .. the Simpsons … that crap is fine … but Happy Holidays .. OH No can’t have that.
By the way … you may want to google Saturnalia … that is where most of the Christmas traditions come from
I apologize for the rant. I am so FRACKIN sick of the ‘war on xmas’ BS that it makes my head explode.
Hmmmmm I wonder if asshat will get me moderated
Nicole Dec 20th 2009 at 10:56 pm 39
It seems asshat will not get you moderated
You know the puritans .. the Thanksgiving puritans.. the we came to the new world because we were religiously persecuted puritans ???? - yes THOSE puritans
Yeah … they wanted to ban the celebration of Christmas all together
http://masstraveljournal.com/features/boston-cambridge/when-christmas-was-banned-boston
Wake me when it is January 2nd
John Small Berries Dec 21st 2009 at 12:55 am 40
I really don’t understand what’s so offensive about “happy holidays”. After all, the literal meaning of “holiday” is “holy day”.
And about the only people I can see getting worked up about being wished “happy holy days” are atheists - and even then, only the ones with a huge stick up their ass.
Mitch4 Dec 21st 2009 at 04:51 am 41
I’ll just add myself to the list of “I’m not Christian but happy to celebrate Christmas”. It becomes more about Santa Claus than Jesus, and I guess I can understand if the devout worry that this dilutes or derails the religious aspect.
Mark M Dec 21st 2009 at 08:52 am 42
Personally, I’d say this whole war on the “war on Christmas” is more annoying than anything. Now we are concerned with what someone puts on their own blog? If you get your underpants in a knot over this, you’re thinking about it too much.
Nicole Dec 21st 2009 at 08:58 am 43
John Small Berries — as an athiest, I can tell you that I don’t get upset when people wish me:Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays (or holy days), Happy Kwanza, Happy Chanunakah, Happy Easter, Blessed Beltain or any other greeting that people might share around religious holidays. Nor, might I add, does any other athiest I know or have heard speak.
What does get my knickers in a twist is when people of a religion (you know who you are) expect special treatment, and recognition over and above other beliefs. As I believe I said in a previous post … those people should grow up.
Oh … and your name TMI … way TMI .. LOL
Tim Dec 21st 2009 at 10:11 am 44
My 2c… I am a Christian, and that has nothing to do with my celebrating Christmas. There is no biblical authority for celebrating the birth of Christ, and Jesus was no born anywhere near December 25th - shepherds would not have been out in the fields in mid-winter.
At the same time, I think the people who insist on “Merry Christmas” see “Happy Holidays” as a way to be “non-offensive/politically correct,” and they’re tired of it. They know that “not everyone on the planet shares their belief system,” but they really don’t care what people in other places do. America was founded on Biblical values and Biblical beliefs, whether people like to admit that or not. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court once said that blaspheming Jesus was not protected by “freedom of speech,” because most of the people here (not even everybody at that time) believed in the Bible. Most people are not trying to “conform to the ideals of the world community”; they came here because they were tired of the way other countries did things.
marie Dec 21st 2009 at 10:19 am 45
There is now a website (standforchristmas.com) that rates stores based on how much they emphasize Christmas as opposed to holidays in general. People leave comments like, “Was wished a Happy Hanukkah as I left the store. When I stopped and explained I was Christian, the lady at the counter told me ‘Happy Holidays!’ This was very offensive!” and, “Since you are only selling “Holiday Gifts” and I only buy “Christmas Gifts”, there will be no need for me to shop in your store.” When I worked in retail oh so long ago, I never had anyone complain that I said “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas”. Strange, but people seemed to care more that I helped them find what they needed and ring them out as quickly as possible, all with a friendly attitude, than whether I acknowledged their Christianity or not.
marie Dec 21st 2009 at 10:27 am 46
Tim: Re: “I think the people who insist on “Merry Christmas” see “Happy Holidays” as a way to be “non-offensive/politically correct,” and they’re tired of it.”
Tired of people trying to be considerate of others? Interesting…
Nicole Dec 21st 2009 at 11:08 am 47
Tim — no no no — America was not founded on biblical values — it was founded as a secular nation. Explain to me if you will why god is not mentioned at all in the Constitution and only in the most vague way in the Declaration of Independance.
From the Treaty of Tripoli –Article 1.1
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
Mark M Dec 21st 2009 at 11:43 am 48
Nicole, I think you are talking about 2 different things. Of course we can only speculate what was the intention of actions done over 200 years ago, but as I understand, one of the big reasons why people left England for the new land was they would not be forced to practice the religion mandated by the government. That was the essence of separation of church and state, not the PC nonsense some think it is, like covering a cross when the president does a speech from inside a church. But saying the country was founded on biblical values doesn’t mean God has to mentioned in the Constitution. “Thou shall not steal” is a biblical value - after all, it is one of the commandments - and it’s also a law.
Cidu Bill Dec 21st 2009 at 11:52 am 49
Marie, do you suppose anybody believes that frist standforchristmas.com claim? Is there a store anyplace in the United States where the clerk will automatically wish a customer they don’t know a happy Chanukah? I mean, except for the Temple Beth Israel gift shop, of course.
Kate C Dec 21st 2009 at 11:57 am 50
CIDU Bill–Sorry: I misunderstood SP Charles’s comment/question.
marie Dec 21st 2009 at 11:57 am 51
Re: The 10 Commandments and the Constitution
The Constitution is not based on the Ten Commandments. If it were, it would be unconstitutional to worship any god other than the god of the Ten Commandments, to take the name of God in vain, to work on the Sabbath, to despise our parents, to kill/murder (the Constitution allows the declaration of war), to commit adultery, to lie about your neighbors, or to covet your neighbor’s wife, house, etc. Stealing is borderline, as the federal government can use eminent domain to take private property for public use, which can be interpreted as stealing.
marie Dec 21st 2009 at 12:08 pm 52
Bill: Meh, who knows. It’s possible that the cashier was trying to see if it would actually offend someone, or the cashier was sick of Christmas (as someone who’s worked several Christmases in retail, I can assure you that by the first week of December I was ready to rip the tongue out of anyone who dared sing Christmas songs around me), or maybe most of the customers were Jewish, so the cashier got used to saying “Happy Chanukah”. Or the cashier looked at the calendar and saw the “Chanukah Begins” printed on that day’s date. Heck, maybe the cashier was reveling in the holiday season and alternated greetings to every customer - one gets “Merry Christmas”, the next “Happy Holidays”, the next “Happy Winter Solstice”, etc.
marie Dec 21st 2009 at 12:16 pm 53
(hit submit too early, gorram it)
But yeah, it’s also possible that the Christmas militant who wrote it just made it up.
As for me, I really don’t see the problem with not wanting to single out a single religion’s holiday above all others, even if that religion has a majority in the country. How selfish and self-righteous of anyone to complain about stores trying to please everyone instead of just Christians. It’s also fairly amusing to me that anyone would seek out a confirmation of their faith at the Gap, and get upset when it doesn’t come.
Keera Dec 21st 2009 at 12:17 pm 54
Mark M, it is commonly believed that the Puritans were oppressed in their native England, but they were actually mad at how liberal society was becoming and fled to the new world so they could as conservative as they wanted.
Keera Dec 21st 2009 at 12:20 pm 55
“could be as conservative”. I assume you understood that.
Nicole Dec 21st 2009 at 02:03 pm 56
Mark — are you saying that no civilization had laws against stealing till the bible came along .. or kilkling? Of course not these are common sense laws that have existed throughout time. As far as the rest of the ten commandments go, as Marie pointed out, few if any are codified. Niether are any of the laws written in Leviticus. Many people enjoy pork and shellfish on a regular basis.
Lets not forget how quick the puritans were to practice religious intollerance in the New World. Many people were executed because the puritans believed them to be witches, and people were routinely punished for not following the religion the puritans followed.
Winter Wallaby Dec 21st 2009 at 02:28 pm 57
Mark M, it hardly seems like “speculation” to, upon being told that America was founded on the Bible, check our foundational document (the Constitution) to see whether it anywhere mentions the Bible, or Christianity.
Since every major culture and religion in the world prohibits stealing, that’s hardly good evidence that our laws are based on the Bible. If you really want to check whether our laws are based on the Ten Commandments, it would make more sense to see whether the Commandments not common to other religions and cultures are enshrined in our Consitution or our laws—e.g. taking the name of the Lord in vain, creating idols, coveting your neighbor’s goods, etc. . .—none of those are.
Mark M Dec 21st 2009 at 04:10 pm 58
I wasn’t implying that lawmakers read the Bible to get their ideas, just that many of the concepts from the Bible help form the way people think, including our founding fathers. It’s just one of many factors that influence our opinions. That doesn’t mean if you’re a Christian developing a new country you have to mention God or Christianity in the Constitution. I am very glad that they did not. One thing I have noticed - when something like a law against stealing is mentioned, non-Christians are quick to point out that it has nothing to do with the Bible. But then they’ll turn around and say one of the “victimless” crimes, like prostitution for example, should be made legal because we shouldn’t legislate morality. Can’t have it both ways.
Winter Wallaby Dec 21st 2009 at 04:24 pm 59
Mark M, I am unable to see the contradiction between “laws against stealing are not specific to the Bible,” and “laws should have a victim.” Why is this “having it both ways”?
CIDU Bill Dec 21st 2009 at 04:48 pm 60
Tim (#44), even if “America was founded on Biblical values and Biblical beliefs,” the Bible encompasses more than Christianity.
And just because a Supreme Court justice said that blaspheming Jesus isn’t protected speech because most people believe in the Bible (and again I assume you’re considering the Bible a purely Christian book) doesn’t mean he’s right. Because, you know, he isn’t.
Mark M Dec 21st 2009 at 04:48 pm 61
Winter Wallaby, I have been involved in other discussions where I was told by athiests that laws against prostitution, abortion, gay marriage, etc. are based on Christian beliefs and that we are “legislating morality”. When I then ask if stealing should be legal, they say of course not! Why is that, because they think stealing is immoral? That is trying to have it both ways.
S.P. Charles Dec 21st 2009 at 04:53 pm 62
Mark M, your argument is based on the premise that morality cannot exist without Christian belief.
The Bad Seed Dec 21st 2009 at 05:22 pm 63
Mark M - I am not an atheist, and I am not an anarchist heathen. However, I don’t think you understand what “victimless crime” means. If I want to sit at home on a Saturday night and smoke a joint while watching a movie, I’m not hurting you. If I want to bet on the horses or engage a prostitute, I’m not hurting you. Those are the kinds of things generally referred to as “victimless crimes”. Those types of activities are the gray area where many people believe the government has no place interfering. After all, what makes marijuana illegal for use in my own home while alcohol is legal? Why do you care who I marry, and why does my choice affect you in any way? Who are you - or anyone else, for that matter - to tell me how exactly to live my life in this “free” country?
My father was a very religious and conservative Republican, but he believed that the government should interfere in the lives of its citizens as little as possible. Dad was even Pro-Choice, because he believed in the original tenets of the Republican Party, which gave people as much control as possible over their own lives, and the associated rights and responsibilities.
mitch4 Dec 21st 2009 at 06:59 pm 64
May I pause to point out that the Ten Commandments come from the Old Testament?
mitch4 Dec 21st 2009 at 07:10 pm 65
Actually, I used to be among those who would quickly and eagerly say “You can’t [i.e. oughtn’t] legislate morality.” But eventually I came to feel there is //a little// to be said for the “natural law” movement, and even positions not all that removed from what Mark is espousing — though without the ties to particular religions, particular religious texts, or indeed religion at all.
The point is only that there is a reason we have wanted codified laws against crimes theft and murder, rooted in our nearly-unanimous shared sense that these acts are wrong, and wrong in a way that suggests they should be treated as crimes in formalized society (in legal codes, in the case of our system). Whatever the origins of this widespread shared sense of broad brushstrokes of a common ethics, it can’t always depend on prior codification in an endless regress. That is, it’s not because we inherited the Ten Commandments, for instance.
Tim Dec 21st 2009 at 10:02 pm 66
Bill, it wasn’t “a supreme court justice” who said that - it was the chief justice, in the majority decision of the court. The US was never intended to be a secular nation; every document by the founders contradicts that. The least religious of them, Ben Franklin, was the one who demanded that all work by Congress cease until a minister was found to open the sessions with a prayer, which continues to this day. The Treaty of Tripoli says that this was a secular nation; every other document from the foundation to around 1960 says otherwise. The logical conclusion is that things were toned down to prevent a war with Islam back then. “God” is mentioned many times in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and even more explicitly in state constitutions; it was once law in Massachusetts, for example, that the governor had to be a member of an accepted Protestant church. While times have changed, the facts about the foundation of America haven’t.
CIDU Bill Dec 21st 2009 at 10:08 pm 67
Justice or chief justice, it’s equally wrong. What was the context of this comment?
Nicole Dec 21st 2009 at 10:27 pm 68
Tim — I am not sure where you get you information — a search of the word god in the Declaration of Independence finds one occurrence, the only other reference is the very generic creator.
A search of the Constitution zero occurrences of the word god
Jesus does not appear in either document.
What does appear in the Constitution is the following …
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
and
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Congress shall NOT establish a religion and no religious test for office. That sounds pretty secular to me.
Re: State Constitutions — the US Constitution trumps state constitutions. To put it another way … States can not over ride the US constitution.
Tim Dec 21st 2009 at 10:29 pm 69
“The free, equal, and undisturbed, enjoyment of religious opinion, whatever it may be, and free and decent discussions on any religious subject, is granted and secured; but to revile, with malicious and blasphemous contempt, the religion professed by almost the whole community, is an abuse of that right. Nor are we bound, by any expressions in the constitution, as some have strangely supposed, either not to punish at all, or to punish indiscriminately the like attacks upon the religion of Mahomet or of the grand Lama; and for this plain reason, that the case assumes that we are a christian people, and the morality of the country is deeply ingrafted upon Christianity, and not upon the doctrines or worship of those impostors.”
- Chief Justice James Kent, People v. Ruggles.
This would not be the decision of the Supreme Court today, but this was the precedent for every case until 1962, when the courts started to legislate from the bench. This was the Supreme Court’s decision, by definition the Constitutional understanding, and the Law of the Land.
Tim Dec 21st 2009 at 10:39 pm 70
Nicole,
There was no need to be more explicit in the US Constitution, since this was like water to a fish at the time. The purpose of the US Constitution was, as far as possible, to limit the power of the federal government. It is a mostly list of what the federal government could NOT do.
However, to spell things out more explicitly for us today:
The first amendment was intended to prevent any one denomination from being the official religion, but this is far, far from intending “a secular state.” An early draft phrased this: “All men have an equal, natural, and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that no particular sect or society of Christians ought to be favored or established by law in preference to others.” This is how this was understood for over 150 years.
Article I, Section 7: “If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it.” Why were Sundays excepted, and not Saturday (the Jewish Sabbath) or Friday (the Muslim day of worship)?
You say that the only references to God in the Constitution are vague references to “the very generic creator.” This is looking at this document from a modern perspective, and not in the context of these people. They all saw “Nature’s God… the Supreme Judge of the Universe” (from the DoI) as the God of the Bible.
Winter Wallaby Dec 21st 2009 at 10:59 pm 71
Tim, you’re choosing to “spell out for us” what the First Amendment really means by quoting a rejected draft of the First Amendment. Doesn’t something strike you as rather odd about the fact that to defend your reading, you have to resort to wording that the Founding Fathers chose not to pass?
And Nicole did not say that the only references to God in the Constitution were vague references to a generic creator. She said that the word God appears nowhere in the Constitution. She is correct.
Tim Dec 21st 2009 at 11:09 pm 72
@WW, I was spelling out what was understood for generations, and only re-interpreted in the last 50 years. Every time there was some question about the meaning of the first amendment, it was described in that same way.
The truly ironic thing is that I got into this discussion by stating that Jesus was not born on December 25 and that there is no Biblical basis for celebrating His birth.
Arthur Dec 21st 2009 at 11:09 pm 73
Tim said, “it wasn’t “a supreme court justice” who said that - it was the chief justice”
Actually, it was the chief justice of the NY supreme court, not the US supreme court.
Also, see http://www.sullivan-county.com/bush/myth2.htm
Nicole Dec 22nd 2009 at 09:49 am 74
Actually, you could say that my reference to Saturnalia was a comment on the birth of Jesus not being in December. But I think that most people understand that Decmeber 25th was chosen as a date of convenience. People were celebrating the Solstice and it seemed like a good idea to combine celebrations in order to win over more believers.
“There was no need to be more explicit in the US Constitution, since this was like water to a fish at the time”
Then why did any documents refer to god? If that is true shouldn’t all documents be as devoid of religious references as the Constitution. But that is not the case. You yourself have pointed out that religious references are common in state constitutions, and in many other documents of the time. Leaving out references to god in the Constitution seems to be deliberate.
“The first amendment was intended to prevent any one denomination from being the official religion, but this is far, far from intending “a secular state.” An early draft phrased this: “All men have an equal, natural, and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that no particular sect or society of Christians ought to be favored or established by law in preference to others.”
Quoting a first draft is meaningless. If the founders had wanted the first amendment to read that way they would have left it that way, they didn’t. They rejected this language for the far broader and inclusive of all religions: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” . This rejection of specific references to Christianity and changing it to refer to all religions makes it clearer that they were interested in a secular government.
“first amendment was intended to prevent any one denomination from being the official religion”.
Given you prior comments I assume you mean any Christian denomination. Then what you are saying is that the first amendment as it is written today would not prevent Islam as being established as an official religion ?
The exception for Sunday was simply a matter of practicality. That the vast majority of Americans of the time attended church on Sunday is not contested. That being the case it is not surprising that the constitution would make an exception for Sunday when most people would not be available. In the same way that New York schools close down for the Jewish holidays of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. So many people would be absent that trying to carry on business is pointless.
No, what is said is that there are zero references to god in the Constitution. Google “Constitution text” , go to a site that has the text of the constitution, and search for the word ‘god’ you will get zero hits.
I also said that there is no reference to Jesus in either document. For a country founded on Christian values this seems more than passing strange.
There are references to a deity in the Declaration of Independence. But as noted they are generic. Why use generic language when ti would make perfect sense to reference Christian tenets when founding a Chritian Nation ?
That the founders believed in a deity is not debated and it doesnt even matter if they were devout Christains. That is not in question. The question is did they intend a secular nation. The first amendment is unambiguous, “Congress shall establish no religion” You can interpret it using rejected language if you like, I will use what was enacted. “No religious test shall be required for office” again unambiguous. The founders did not want the government involved in religion or religion involved in government.
Also it is important to distinguish the Declaration from the Constitution. The Declaration was a statement of intent to separate from England and was written in the way that the world would understand.
The Constitution is the law of the land, and it IS significant that the law governing us does not mention god or Jesus. It begins “We the People” not “Almighty God”.
Re: The Treaty of Tripoli. Once again unambiguous language … “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;” If you have any documentation from the time supporting your statement that “The Treaty of Tripoli says that this was a secular nation; every other document from the foundation to around 1960 says otherwise. The logical conclusion is that things were toned down to prevent a war with Islam back then.” I should like to see them. These would be federal documents, since I have already agreed that many state constitutions had (and still have) religious references and we are discussing if the the United States was meant to be secular not Virgina, New York, North Carolina or any of the other colonies.
Mark M Dec 22nd 2009 at 10:09 am 75
S.P. Charles - No, if you go back and read my last comment again actually my argument is based on the opposite of that. As I said, I have had others tell me that something like stealing should be illegal, and then I acknowledged the fact the reason they think that is because it is immoral. Clearly if they are athiests they have morals that have come from other sources.
The Bad Seed - I don’t think I ever once told you what you can and can’t do. I don’t go around looking for someone smoking a joint so I can call the police on them. In fact, I tend to think that it should be legalized. And if you think none of the items you mentioned hurts anyone, then why did you refer to them as “gray areas”. Let me ask this. Do you think sex with animals should be legal? How about polygamy? If not, then please explain why since as you infer it is not hurting anyone.
Nicole Dec 22nd 2009 at 10:29 am 76
Why do morals HAVE to come from other sources. Can’t I decided that I don’t like being stolen from, therfore won’t steal from other people ?
TonyJazz Dec 22nd 2009 at 05:09 pm 77
Going back to Tom Batiuk doing the Johnny Hart route: has his recent Funky strips about a teenage boy singing Broadway showtunes been a homophobic series? Not knowing his politics, I though he was going to show the harm of bullying and bigotry in High School. Instead, maybe he was going for laughs? Nothing has really become of that story-line, so far….
Nicole Dec 22nd 2009 at 06:02 pm 78
While I recognize that the ACLU is suspect in certain quarters, this is what they have to say about the history of Christmas celebration in America. The site does provide footnotes -
http://www.aclu.org/node/20595
“In the same rough spirit of the Puritans’ opposition to Christmas, December 25 remained without legal status as a holiday in 19th century America, and employers, like Ebenezer Scrooge in England, had the authority to decide whether or not to allow workers time off to attend church. Federal employees were required to show up for work. “Congress met on Christmas Day every year from 1789 to 1855, with only three exceptions,” and “public schools met on Christmas day in parts of New England at least until 1870.”4 It was not until June 1870 — three weeks after the death of the author of A Christmas Carol — that the U.S. Congress made Christmas into an official national holiday. “
Mark M Dec 22nd 2009 at 07:12 pm 79
“Why do morals HAVE to come from other sources. Can’t I decided that I don’t like being stolen from, therfore won’t steal from other people ?”
Nicole, life experience is a source.
Nicole Dec 22nd 2009 at 07:58 pm 80
Touche’
Nicole Dec 24th 2009 at 11:30 pm 81
Merry … no … Happy Holidays
Merry Christmas to all